Should a business owner have the right to refuse service to customers?

[BigRedBuster]

8 hours ago, Moiraine said:

This is from 2012, and there's a video on Facebook of Paul Ryan standing next to this guy at a rally as he tells his story.

 

 

 

I have had politicians ask to come to our business and I said no.  I can understand this guy and support him based on he doesn't support Obama and Biden...so, why would he want his family and business to be a photo op for them?  The whole Christian faith thing was awkward and he obviously threw that out there with no basis behind it.

[Moiraine]

48 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I have had politicians ask to come to our business and I said no.  I can understand this guy and support him based on he doesn't support Obama and Biden...so, why would he want his family and business to be a photo op for them?  The whole Christian faith thing was awkward and he obviously threw that out there with no basis behind it.

 

 

I'm not saying he's wrong. I'm saying people were conveniently totally fine with this who are up in arms about Sanders getting kicked out.

 

Admittedly they're not the same thing (getting kicked out vs not being allowed to have a political event) but the same people would probably be fine with gay people not being allowed in businesses over religious beliefs.

[TGHusker]

 

 

• 

 

https://world.wng.org/news-illustrated

[knapplc]

This reminds me - still no verification that Mike Huckabee's story is true.  Seems like the kind of thing he'd make up.

 

Last I checked, the woman at the Red Hen still hadn't been able to open her restaurant again.  There are protesters outside (or had been).

 

 

[TGHusker]

16 hours ago, knapplc said:

This reminds me - still no verification that Mike Huckabee's story is true.  Seems like the kind of thing he'd make up.

 

Last I checked, the woman at the Red Hen still hadn't been able to open her restaurant again.  There are protesters outside (or had been).

 

 

At this point, I'd say the protesters are now in the wrong for violating her right to run her business  and indirectly her right to free speech.

[NM11046]

On 6/26/2018 at 9:56 AM, TGHusker said:

Chick-fil-a and Hobby Lobby are companies I support and I support their owners right to voice their opinion on political and non-political issues.    It is a business decision to speak out and they may lose some customers as a result.  What I would not support is a litmus test on who they would serve as a company.  Neither business has such a litmus test and all are welcomed.    I've always found employees to be friendly and helpful in both places - both promoting a friendly culture.   Chick's sandwiches are good for fast food - nothing out of the world but beats a burger if you are tired of burgers.  Hobby Lobby is like Walmart - full of stuff from China.   I'd prefer to see more Made in USA labels. 

And I have never set foot in a Hobby Lobby and stopped going to Chick-fil-a after the LGTBQ issues were brought to light.  I respect your decision to support them based on their beliefs as much as I respect those who determine they would like to do business elsewhere.

 

This is an interesting question that made me think quite a bit.  I had an initial, immediate reaction but then when I really thought about it I wasn't sure what drove that.  Perfect example of how we assume our beliefs/politics should have us believing one thing because a party goes that way.  

 

Anyway, I think I'm ok with business's not serving some people based on beliefs BUT who they won't serve should legally have to be posted fully at the door.  One should know before walking into a place of business if they will be turned away (I'm thinking a example of this would be a business who decides to turn away because of race ... it's easy to tell someone to leave, it's harder to post on the door that you won't serve black men).  And this would have the added benefit of the business publicly taking a stance on things a business owner feels are important - there would be businesses I'd put in the Hobby Lobby/Chick-Fil-Et category for my business if they opening posted their core beliefs.

[NM11046]

And .... confimation that Hobby Lobby is a business positioning itself in politics under the guise of christianity.

 

[Danimal]

On ‎6‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 3:24 PM, TGHusker said:

More on the Sanders situation. Mike Huckabee, Sarah's dad, reported that the protest to Sarah Sanders didn't stop at the Red Hen

One problem with Huckabee's statement is what I put in bold.  Trump has been a poor example of civil exchange and could be

pointed to as the person who started this recent public bad mouthing - starting in the primaries and continuing during his presidency.

 

We also have the Florida attorney general being harassed by protesters as she left the Mr Rogers movie over the weekend.  This may be off topic again-

but it just represents the ugly climate we are in.  

 

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/mike-huckabee-red-hen-owner-followed-sarah-sanders-family-across-street-heckled

 

 

 

Unfortunately both sides are moving away from classical liberal values into more ugly, authoritarian modes.

[Making Chimichangas]

TL;DR

 

I am perfectly fine with an owner of a business denying a certain person if that denial is based on things such as:

 

*the customer is rude to staff

*not wearing suitable attire (no shirt, no shoes, etc)

*is loud, disruptive, beligerent

*makes unwanted sexual advances to waiter/waitress/staff

 

In cases like that, yes absolutely a business owner/manager should have the right to say no.

 

But to refuse service to an entire subset of the population, based on personal and/or religious beliefs?  No way in Hades.

[sho]

29 minutes ago, Making Chimichangas said:

TL;DR

 

I am perfectly fine with an owner of a business denying a certain person if that denial is based on things such as:

 

*the customer is rude to staff

*not wearing suitable attire (no shirt, no shoes, etc)

*is loud, disruptive, beligerent

*makes unwanted sexual advances to waiter/waitress/staff

 

In cases like that, yes absolutely a business owner/manager should have the right to say no.

 

But to refuse service to an entire subset of the population, based on personal and/or religious beliefs?  No way in Hades.

 

Should black business owners be allowed to refuse service to KKK members?   Can a Jewish run business refuse service to a Nazi group that promotes race segregation?   Should a LGBTQ+ business be forced to do business with Westboro Baptist Church, if the church demanded they do business with them?

 

As long as they are not violating any of your 4 bullet points, should these types of business be forced to do business with groups that want to eliminate them?  What happens if doing business with a small subset of the population makes you so unpopular that majority of your business no longer wants you?  Should a business be forced to lose current customers to accommodate a subset that will harm the business reputation?

 

Personally, I say no.  Business has the right to refuse service to anyone they deem.  If it's too large of a subset of the population, they won't have a thriving business to worry about.

[ZRod]

11 minutes ago, sho said:

 

Should black business owners be allowed to refuse service to KKK members?   Can a Jewish run business refuse service to a Nazi group that promotes race segregation?   Should a LGBTQ+ business be forced to do business with Westboro Baptist Church, if the church demanded they do business with them?

 

As long as they are not violating any of your 4 bullet points, should these types of business be forced to do business with groups that want to eliminate them?  What happens if doing business with a small subset of the population makes you so unpopular that majority of your business no longer wants you?  Should a business be forced to lose current customers to accommodate a subset that will harm the business reputation?

 

Personally, I say no.  Business has the right to refuse service to anyone they deem.  If it's too large of a subset of the population, they won't have a thriving business to worry about.

This is where I'm at. This is probably going to come off wrong and callus, but be careful what you wish for.

[Ric Flair]

On 6/26/2018 at 11:38 PM, Landlord said:

Here's my general philosophy of how things ought to be.

 

First thing, there's got to be an acknowledgment and education of the different types of things that can or can not be refused to customers. Anything involving freedom of speech, or an extension of it through artistic talent, products of creative expression, artisanal crafts, etc., should be and are protected pretty much carte blanche, except in rare cases of direct threat of violence, some scenarios of libel/slander, etc.

 

Someone should be allowed to refuse to make a piece of jewelry for a Christian because they are against the religion, just as someone should be able to refuse a commissioned painting to a black person because they're racist, just as someone should be able to refuse an interior decorating project to a Jew because they're anti-semitic, etc. Sociologically we all ought to do our damndest to fix those behaviors, but they need to be protected because freedom of speech is a cornerstone of a free society and that includes the freedom to say/think awful things, even though we hope to weed those out of people the best we can.

 

When it comes to anything else, say running a bar or a restaurant or a bookstore or a coffee shop or a tire store, etc., I guess I'm of the opinion that you should be able to refuse some or any service for any reason you see fit, as long as the reason you're doing it isn't based off a protected class. You can refuse to let a black guy into your club if he's wearing an Affliction or Tapout t-shirt, but you can't not let a black guy into your bar because he's black. That perhaps opens up a little bit too much leniency of lying/excusing the true intentions, but I guess that's what the courts are for? 

 

This seems reasonable to me.

[Making Chimichangas]

2 hours ago, sho said:

 

Should black business owners be allowed to refuse service to KKK members?   Can a Jewish run business refuse service to a Nazi group that promotes race segregation?   Should a LGBTQ+ business be forced to do business with Westboro Baptist Church, if the church demanded they do business with them?

 

As long as they are not violating any of your 4 bullet points, should these types of business be forced to do business with groups that want to eliminate them?  What happens if doing business with a small subset of the population makes you so unpopular that majority of your business no longer wants you?  Should a business be forced to lose current customers to accommodate a subset that will harm the business reputation?

 

Personally, I say no.  Business has the right to refuse service to anyone they deem.  If it's too large of a subset of the population, they won't have a thriving business to worry about.

 

I literally only meant those 4 bullet points as examples.  There is no conceivable way I could have included every single scenario.

 

And for the record, I think the chances of a neo-nazi knowingly patronizing a Jewish deli to get that rueben sandwich is about as likely as a meteor falling through the sky, burning up just to the size of a small rock, and hitting Trump in the head.  Could it happen?  Sure.

 

It makes me so resigned to have to respond to topics like this.  Most of you are white and male.  You'll probably never experience what it is like to be on the receiving end of such discrimination.  I have.  It sucks and it makes you feel less than human.  I just wish there was a way I could get you all to see how awful this type of blanket discrimination truly is.

[Landlord]

3 minutes ago, Making Chimichangas said:

It makes me so resigned to have to respond to topics like this.  Most of you are white and male.  You'll probably never experience what it is like to be on the receiving end of such discrimination.  I have.  It sucks and it makes you feel less than human.  I just wish there was a way I could get you all to see how awful this type of blanket discrimination truly is.

 

The issue isn't that it's awful, but that reasonable people believe that that discrimination and hatred will still exist even if the government makes it illegal to discriminate.

[Making Chimichangas]

4 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

The issue isn't that it's awful, but that reasonable people believe that that discrimination and hatred will still exist even if the government makes it illegal to discriminate.

 

I understand that.  My point is, these "religious liberty" laws make that discrimination legal and provides people like me with absolutely no way to address those grievances.